pakistanfandomcom-20200213-history
Talk:Emergency 2007
Coverage of the e-Resistance/Resistance 2.0 * [http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39990 POLITICS-PAKISTAN: Intelligentsia Finds Ways to Beat Emergency Rule], Beena Sarwar, KARACHI, Nov 9 (IPS) * [http://www.businessweek.com/print/globalbiz/content/nov2007/gb20071112_430063.htm Virtual Protests in Pakistan], Manjeet Kripalani, BusinessWeek, November 12, 2007, 7:26AM EST. * [http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40035 POLITICS: Gagged at Home, Pakistanis Take to Cyberspace], Abid Aslam, WASHINGTON, Nov 13 (IPS) * Funny thing is, the most factually and technically accurate article on the issue might be this one on the BBC Urdu website. translation will be available soon. * [http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2007/11/pakistani_bloggers_voice_opini.php Pakistani Bloggers Speak Out on “Emergency Rule”: BetterKnowanSFBlog - Metroblogging] Tue Nov 20, 2007 at 09:00:00 AM By Tyler Callister in SF Weekly's '''The Snitch''' Anonymous Peace is not just the absence of conflict, its the presence of justice. PCO is the massacre of Justice and civilized rule in Pakistan. It is hereby condemned in strongest possible terms. That is one opinion; contrary viewpoints also exist and should be reflected here. Do not try to push through one specific point of view, no matter how strongly you feel about it and even if you truly believe it is correct. Instead, the job of the contributers should be to simply list the diverse viewpoints and let the readers decide for themselves. It should not be the business of the contributers to supress/minimise certain viewpoints while openly endorsing a particular political line. Change heading to "Martial Law 2007" instead of "Emergency 2007"? Is it possible to change this page's heading to "martial law 2007" instead of "emergency 2007"? Using "emergency" plays into the regime's strategy and marketing. Perhaps a compromise could be to label it "emergency/martial law 2007" but I think it's important to call this what it is. Thanks. :Actually, if you wanted to get into it, it isn't even that. It is the complete absence of law. A martial law can and should be formally defined. :The bigger problem is that the site is now linked from a lot of places. I will set up a redirect from Martial Law 2007 so you can use that URL as well--and maybe we should. :IFaqeer 21:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC) You should stick with the balanced 'Emergency 2007' heading, the common term, instead of replacing it with the rhetorical/emotional 'martial law 2007', which obviously serves the interest of a particular section. Try to write here in a neutral fashion instead of forcing in your political views. Add a link to Global Voices' Pakistan Emergency 2007 page? Hi http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/specialcoverage/pakistan-emergency-2007/ syndicates several sources of info through their RSS feeds. So it can be particularly useful for people who are not used to subscribing to RSS feeds individually. Claude Almansi :Wilco. :IFaqeer 21:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC) Should we add this statement to the front page, it is the best I have seen But, for once, I want being Pakistani to mean more for me than cheering a cricket match victory, or mindlessly waving a green flag on the 14th of August. I want to 'be' this country, to feel one with it, to be proud of it in all respects, to heal the wounds that decades of turmoil have wrought upon its crumbling visage. And, in these darkest of times, I pledge, as Allah is my witness, to do my utmost to make that happen. As Posted by The Neem Revolution in a popular blog The purpose of wikia, as far as I can tell, is to merely report on a subject/topic without supporting or siding with any particular viewpoint. Unfortunately, I note here the tendency of many, rather all, contributers to push through their own presuppositions and a priori political agenda. Petitions This is the third time I have noted that links to the pro-emergency petitions have been removed and only anti-emergency petitions have been allowed here. Even if we may have a particular viewpoint, let's put that aside for now. Here the purpose of the contributors should only be to present ALL viewpoints, without siding with any position or promoting any stance, and let the READERS DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES.